As interest grows in facilitating, funding, and investigating inclusive innovation processes in agrifood systems in the Global South, a need has emerged for middle-range theory that can describe the key features and causal dynamics of these processes across diverse contexts. This paper advances theory-building by testing and refining an existing middle-range theory of inclusive innovation processes in agrifood systems in the Global South through a case study of an inclusive innovation process involving smallholder farming communities in the Ecuadorian Andes. We used a case study replication design to test the initial theory. To develop the case study, we conducted primary qualitative research, including interviews, informal personal communications, and document reviews. Data analysis was conducted in two phases: in the first phase, we developed a timeline and causal narrative of the case and in the second phase, we conducted inductive and deductive thematic analysis. We find that each component of the existing middle-range model played an important role, as predicted, in the inclusive innovation process described in the case study. Our analysis also reveals additional component categories, including process inputs, initial contextual conditions, and actor-level mechanisms, that featured prominently in the case but were omitted from the existing theory. The case also revealed a more nuanced, phased causal dynamic than that described in the existing middle-range model and identified intermediate pilot results as boundary objects that expanded the inclusivity of the innovation process and triggered the causal dynamics predicted by the existing theory. Our findings inform a revision to the existing mid-level model, contributing to building an empirically validated theory of how inclusive innovation processes unfold in agrifood systems that sheds light on specific features of these processes that are important for promoting inclusivity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hoffecker et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: